Re: State of shiny-server packaging
On 16 September 2018 at 21:10, Philip Rinn wrote:
| On 16.09.18 at 20:31, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > [...]
|
| > Yes. Not everything that exists in open source land needs to be in Debian.
| >
| > Some things are simply hard to package. Just how Tobias et al bundled Shiny
| > in their (competing, but also both free-as-in-beer + commercially supported)
| > shinyproxy (which I do understand is awesome for larger deployments) so have
|
| To avoid misinterpretation, shinyproxy is Open Source, not just free-as-in-beer:
| https://github.com/openanalytics/shinyproxy
As is RStudio Shiny Server, in the narrow sense, but in the wider sense the
extended Shiny Servr Pro version requires payment. Just how Open Analytics
would love additional consulting etc pp.
All that is besides the point. You (correctly) argued that package
shiny-server is hard (many build-depends) and I merely added that we don't
have. There are other ways.
| But it's true, there are more alternatives to shiny-server than just shinyproxy
| which might be a little complex for smaller deployments.
Right. And a quick 'docker pull rocker/shiny' suits some other people.
With infinite resources and time would package this. With the finite
resources we have some triaging is needed and other things may make more
sense.
Dirk
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd@debian.org
Reply to: